The
petitioner, Elbert Bryant Gleaves, appeals the denial of his
post-conviction petition. The petitioner argues he received
ineffective assistance of counsel prior to trial forcing him
to accept the State's plea offer. Following our review,
we affirm the denial of the petition.

J.
Ross Dyer, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which
Robert W. Wedemeyer, and D. Kelly Thomas, Jr., JJ., joined.

OPINION

J.
ROSS DYER, JUDGE.

Facts
and Procedural History

This
petition for post-conviction relief is based upon the
petitioner's claim that his trial counsel did not
adequately investigate the case against the petitioner and
this failure deprived the petitioner of constitutionally
effective assistance of counsel. Furthermore, the petitioner
claims that this alleged deficiency resulted in a false
impression that he would only serve four years in prison;
therefore, he did not knowingly, voluntarily, and
intelligently enter the plea agreement with the State of
Tennessee.

The
petitioner was initially charged as a juvenile with
misdemeanor theft and attempted murder. Subsequently, on May
14, 2012, the petitioner was indicted by a Davidson County
grand jury for theft of under $500 in case number 2012-B-1275
and aggravated assault in case number 2012-B-1296. In
addition, the petitioner faced indictments for aggravated
robbery, carjacking, employing a firearm during a dangerous
felony, evading arrest, aggravated assault, and two counts of
leaving the scene of an accident in case number 2012-C-2534.
The petitioner was dissatisfied with counsel who had
represented him in juvenile court and petitioned for
replacement counsel.[1] The court granted the request and
appointed trial counsel to represent the petitioner.

Based
upon testimony from the petitioner and trial counsel the
representation proceeded along the following lines. Trial
counsel spoke briefly with the petitioner after initial
assignment, after which trial counsel met with the petitioner
in prison to discuss the petitioner's options. Trial
counsel encouraged the petitioner to plead guilty in order to
avoid the likely outcome of a significantly longer prison
term. The petitioner's primary concern was to minimize
time spent in prison in order to return to his family as soon
as possible. Trial counsel spoke with the petitioner at least
once more by phone prior to the plea hearing. Prior to
entering his plea, the petitioner met with both trial counsel
and members of his family to discuss the State's offer of
a maximum sentence of ten years. After a discussion with
trial counsel, the petitioner's family asked to speak
with the petitioner alone. After a few minutes, the family
informed trial counsel that the petitioner would accept the
plea agreement.

During
the plea colloquy, the State announced that the petitioner
would plead guilty to the following: theft of property under
$500 and receive a sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine
days; two counts of aggravated assault and receive a sentence
of three years as a Range I offender for each; and aggravated
robbery and receive a ten year sentence. All the sentences
would run concurrently for a total effective sentence of ten
years. Per the plea agreement, the other counts of the
indictment would be dismissed. After the State announced the
terms of the plea, the trial court explained the sentence in
detail to the petitioner, after which, the petitioner and
trial counsel had a brief discussion off the record. Once
back on the record, the trial court again reiterated that the
petitioner would be receiving a ten-year sentence at
eighty-five percent release eligibility.

The
trial court then informed the petitioner of his rights,
including his right to a jury trial and the presumption of
innocence. The petitioner said he understood the terms of the
plea and trial counsel confirmed this. The State proceeded to
announce its proof, after which, the petitioner plead guilty
to one count of theft under $500, one count of aggravated
robbery, and two counts of aggravated assault. The trial
court ...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.